Barking dogs and a real estate agent: how a farcical AFL tribunal could prompt change | Jo Khan

AFL umpire Nick Foot. Photograph: Michael Willson/AFL Photos/Getty Images

Now take a deep breath and forget all of that, because the issue at the heart of Port’s appeal against the tribunal ruling was not related to an umpire’s part-time gig in sports betting, but someone else’s occupation. There was barely a whisper about the on-field incident during Monday’s appeal. Instead, the conduct of a former Essendon player turned real estate agent was in the spotlight.

Part way through last week’s tribunal, panel member Jason Johnson briefly disconnected from the online hearing to switch from his desktop computer to his phone. A small interruption in itself, but what he did next “was inexplicable and amounted to a miscarriage of justice”, Port argued in their appeal. Johnson got in his car and drove to an open house inspection.

Driving can sometimes feel like an automatic process, especially if it is on a well-known route. But it still requires a significant amount of attention meaning that any other tasks attempted at the same time can’t be given full attention. Port emphasised this point, inferring Johnson was distracted. “The board cannot be satisfied that Mr Johnson in those circumstances was paying proper attention to his duties and adjudicating appropriately.”

It took just 14 minutes for the appeals board to agree with Port and throw out the charge. The board concluded that Johnson’s conduct “constituted a miscarriage of justice” and was “clearly an error of law that had a material impact on the decision of the tribunal”. And so, presumably in a first for the AFL, its tribunal process was brought down by a real estate agent.

The interruptions were not limited to the initial tribunal hearing, though. It was almost fitting that in the midst of ravaging Johnson for his conduct, Port’s legal counsel, Paul Ehrlich KC’s appeal arguments were interrupted by his barking dogs. The lawyer had to mute himself to tell them to shut up. Luckily for Port, Ehrlich’s distraction did not affect the appeal outcome.

The saga, while laughable in nature, ends with the AFL being forced to apologise to Butters, Foot and Port Adelaide, and confront two serious problems: questions about the tribunal process and whether an umpire should be working for a betting company. The fact a tribunal decision has been thrown out due to a panel member’s divided attention suggests the system is not working as intended, Port argued.

The Butters case has brought renewed scrutiny of Foot’s Sportsbet role, with reports the AFL is reconsidering its appropriateness. There is no suggestion that Foot was or has ever been compromised, but it’s hard to see how an umpire working in sports betting was anything other than an integrity disaster waiting to happen for the AFL. They probably didn’t expect it to unfold like this though.